Laserfiche WebLink
<br />requires a variety of sales prices which meet the existing and projected needs of the community. <br />He further noted that it targets 20% of all new housing developments to be affordable for <br />moderate household incomes. He pointed out that the NSSP, by following the General Plan, <br />also has affordable- housing elements and, more importantly, states that a specific plan cannot <br />conflict with the General Plan. Commissioner Lutz stated that this project has never addressed <br />affordable housing and, therefore, he does not believe it is consistent with either the General <br />Plan or the NSSP. <br /> <br /> <br />,~ : <br /> <br />~ <br />i <br />I <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Commissioner Barker stated that she agrees with Commissioner Lutz that the General Plan has <br />a requirement for affordable housing and that the proposed development does not address that <br />issue. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kumaran commented that he, too, does not feel the project is consistent with the <br />General Plan and the NSSP. <br /> <br />Chair Cooper stated that it is simply not feasible for this project to have any affordable housing <br />elements, given the size of the lots and the homes. He realizes that it is not possible to include <br />affordable housing in every project. He further noted that the fees that will be paid by the <br />developer will be paid into the fund which will allow the City to buy down mortgages, etc. and <br />provide affordable housing within other projects. <br /> <br />Mr. Costanzo was allowed to address the Commission again, and he stated that the second unit <br />options could be designated to "lower income housing" . <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright and Chair Cooper <br />Commissioners Barker, Kumaran, and Lutz <br />None <br />None <br /> <br />The motion was denied. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson advised the Commission that the project could not be approved based upon this vote <br />and the applicant will have to appeal to the City Council. He further stated that staff has <br />concluded that the PUD is consistent with the General Plan and the NSSP. Staff will prepare <br />a report to the City Council when the applicant appeals the decision, and the report will include <br />staff's conclusions and the Commission's recommendations. <br /> <br />Chair Cooper feels that it is regrettable that the issue of affordable housing was never raised in <br />this project prior to this evening's meeting and that it would be unreasonable to deny the project <br />at this point. He further stated that staff has already concluded that the project is consistent with <br /> <br />Planning Commission <br /> <br />Page 15 <br /> <br />December 10, 1997 <br />